Today's Topics:
sefirot
Re: Blake and "madness" -Reply -Reply/ Are we allsemi-divine?-Reply -Reply
Re: sefirot
The scientific case against immortality
sefirot -Reply
Re: Bentley Books (fwd)
Re: Ralph's questions
Re: Blake and "madness" -Reply -Reply/ Are we
allsemi-divine?-Reply -Reply -Reply
Re: Blake Books Supplement
Re: Blake and "madness" -Reply -Reply/ Are weallsemi-divine?-Reply -Reply -Reply
Re: Ralph's questions
Re: Blake and "madness" -Reply -Reply/ Are
weallsemi-divine?-Reply -Reply -Reply -Reply
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1998 22:18:26
From: Izak Bouwer
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: sefirot
Message-Id: <3.0.1.16.19980904221826.08f777e2@igs.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi Pam: You have now got me to read up a bit more
about the Kabbalah, and I wonder if you could supply
me with a reference to Rabbi Ashlag's diagrams
describing the process of evolution of the Sefirot?
What are your thoughts about relating the Sefirot to
Blake's system of emanation?
Thanks, Izak
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1998 12:19:57 +0100
From: timli@controls.eurotherm.co.uk (Tim Linnell)
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: Blake and "madness" -Reply -Reply/ Are we allsemi-divine?-Reply -Reply
Message-Id: <199809061119.MAA23345@merlot.controls.eurotherm.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Tim, The particular reference to three housewives in Australia, one of
>whom identified a chateua she had drawn, and the other, marks on the
>floor while having a painful leg-set, is to a videotape shown here by the
>Theosophical Society. I don't normally attend this, but had given a
>lecture on Blake there, and so heard of the video. Becuase the patients
>of the psychologist were videotaped in the doctor's office, drawing and
>regressing and then taped again on approaching the places they'd
>described, and finding them from a nearby road, and then during the
>uncovering of evidence, this is a well-documented case. I think the same
>people who made the film funded the trips overseas of the 3
>housewives, but don't recall this detail.
Visiting their web site,
http://www.theosophical.org/whatis.html
I find the following:
(ahem)
"THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, while reserving for each member full freedom to
interpret those teachings known as
Theosophy, is dedicated to preserving and realizing the ageless wisdom,
which embodies both a world view and a vision of
human self-transformation.
This tradition is founded upon certain fundamental propositions:
1. The universe and all that exists within it are one interrelated and
interdependent whole.
2. Every existent being-from atom to galaxy-is rooted in the same
universal, life-creating Reality. This Reality is all pervasive,
but it can never be summed up in its parts, since it transcends all its
expressions. It reveals itself in the purposeful, ordered,
and meaningful processes of nature as well as in the deepest recesses of
the mind and spirit.
(etc - this goes on quite a bit)
In other words, this is an evangelical organisation for new age beliefs. I
wouldn't go quite so far as to say that this case is obviously fraudulent
without having reviewed the evidence myself, but I'd get quite close.
Several obvious questions:
1) Who funded the visit from Europe to Australia, and why?
2) What was the ratio of success to failure in the groups or people they
took across?
3) How were subjects selected to make a trip or not?
4) How was the site identified by the subject? (try describing how to get to
somewhere in a town YOU lived in only 20 years ago, when much of the
surrounding environment has changed, let alone a specific spot on a large
continent, when you had no geographical context when you were supposed to be
living there!)
5) How is the theosophical society funded (hint: this is explained on their
site: subscriptions give 'discounts' to lectures!). I imagine the videos
aren't exactly given away either...
6) What independant evidence of the matching patterns exist? Were sealed
pictures of the designs provided to a third party before the investigation
was made (not in itself evidence of a positive outcome, but a mark of good
faith)? 7)What archeological evidence exists to prove that the patterns in
Australia had not previously been located, and that they are real?
8) Is there an independantly corraborated journal and timetable of events?
Tom Dillingham spoke of standards of scholarship required to make clinical
assessments of Blake (or intertextual comparisons): frankly you should apply
similar standards when quoting 'proof' of 'unexplained' phenomena. Which are
in fact generally nothing of the kind, although no one would be more pleased
than myself to find actual evidence for a separate spiritual existence.
However 'proof' provided by interested parties means nothing without
techniques for corraboration which, for those of good faith, are easy to
design. Vague mutterings about 'well science doesn't know everything about
the 7 dimensions of space' are true enough (and typical of third age
evangelists, impressing the gullible with their apparent depth of knowledge
of modern science, whilst leaving an impression that those who know the
science properly are closed minded fools - some are, most are not), but we
do know enough to design experiments to elimate hokum and fraud. And decades
of such properly designed experiments have consistently failed to produce
positive results.
I sent you a reference to a short scientific explanation of such matters,
which is well written, and (to my mind well balanced), which I urge you to
find the time to read. (I'll post the reference for others on Monday, but do
not intend further posts on the subject which is now miles away from Blake).
The point is this: there is nothing intrinsically wrong with people
believing any nonsense they choose to, but what I will not accept is to be
called closed minded for admitting the *possibility* of a rational
explanation, which in effect is the implication of you naming the evil of
'Scientific orthodoxy', particularly if the evidence on which they assert a
'spiritual' alternative is so shaky it defies belief. What is perhaps more
worrying is the lack of critical thinking displayed by a professional in the
education system who is (or at least I assume so) engaged in literary
criticism.
Tim
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1998 09:47:08 EDT
From: Chatham1@aol.com
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: sefirot
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
divisions of the form devine-----
a geometry of the powers of man
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 07:42:28 +0100
From: timli@controls.eurotherm.co.uk (Tim Linnell)
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: The scientific case against immortality
Message-Id: <199809070642.HAA21755@merlot.controls.eurotherm.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
(and, in the words of Marge Simpson, let us never speak of this again...)
http://www.infidel.org/library/modern/keith_augustine/scientific_case.html
Tim
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 09:55:32 +0200
From: P Van Schaik
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: sefirot -Reply
Message-Id:
Dear Izak
I read Rabbi Yehudah Ashlag's "An Entrance to the Tree of Life" Old City
Jerusalem Research Centre of Kabbalah, 1977, but made up my own
diagram of the Tree from a variety of sources. It takes me the whole of
the `book' I've written to explain how I relate the Sefirot to Blake, but
primarily I see his entire version of the Fall and Redemption as following
the same narrative pattern as provided by the Kabbalah. Also, I relate all
of Tishby's symbols in his "Wisdom of the Zohar" to Blake.
Hope you enjoy the reading, which is very interesting.
Pam
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1998 12:48:44 +0100 (BST)
From: "E.T. Larrissy"
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: Bentley Books (fwd)
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Forwarded message:
>From ena10 Sun Aug 16 16:56:11 1998
Subject: Re: Bentley Books
To: blake@albion.com
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 16:56:11 +0100 (BST)
In-Reply-To: from "Henriette Stavis" at Aug 14, 98 04:11:37 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 146
See also Bentley's BLAKE BOOKS SUPPLEMENT, a 789-page volume covering work
on Blake 1971-1992 (Oxford: Clarendon Press., 1995).
Edward Larrissy
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 23:21:42
From: Izak Bouwer
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: Ralph's questions
Message-Id: <3.0.1.16.19980907232142.2b974b8e@igs.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 07:39 PM 9/1/98 -0700, Ralph Dumain wrote:
>His use of the word "Atheist" as a pejorative, however,
>would be consistent with the mainstream equation of an atheist
>as a person>with no principles (per Berkeley's slanders
>in ALCIPHRON).
I notice that Blake uses the word "atheist" or derivative only
seven times, and of these, five come from his _Anno Bacon_.
He accused Bacon of disbelief, and said Bacon was evidently
an Epicurean. From _Anno Reynolds_:
Reynolds: "My notion of nature comprehends not only the forms
which nature produces, but also the nature and internal fabrick
and organization ... of the human mind and imagination."
Blake:"Here is a Plain Confession that he Thinks Mind &
Imagination not to be above the Mortal & Perishing Nature.
Such is the End of Epicurean or Newtonian Philosophy;
it is Atheism."
It therefore seems that for Blake atheism relates to the
preoccupation with appearances (sensuous pleasures,
natural phenomena), rather than with the world of the
spirit. By the way, I am sure that modern day science
would still be included in Blake's category of atheism -
for it deals with phenomena in the world of appearance.
>But how would you interpret this>historical progression
>in light of the rest of your argument?
In the process of the Fall, the Spirit is poured into
vessels (churches, or the Covering Cherub) that harden
(thus serving as prisons, and simultaneously as protective
covers) until they can be safely cast off at the Last Judgment.
These churches have the names of biblical figures and of
historical figures related to Christianity, but the name
of Jesus is absent. The reason for this is that Blake
sees Jesus as representing the Imagination, which is
beyond history and the churches.
Blake's 27 churches are grouped into three sets: the first
nine are hermaphroditic Giants (pre-Flood), the next eleven
are Female-Males, a Male within a Female hid ("as in an Ark
& Curtains"), and the last seven are the Male-Females,
Religion hid in War ("a Dragon red & hidden Harlot").
Blake does the same thing here as in the _Mental Traveller_
i.e. he describes the tension between the Spiritual and
the Natural using gender distinction.
> But doesn't this confirm the argument that Blake is
>trapped within>the specific metaphorical structure of
>Bible belief, and taken literally,>contradicts himself?
>How could one argue with a well-intentioned deist
>(Paine) on such a basis?
I would say, as Blake argues in Chapter 3 "To the Deists,"
that Deism is the worship of "the Selfish Virtues of the
Natural Heart." Any Deist is "in the State named Rahab,
which State must be put off before he can be the Friend of Man."
And "Friendship cannot exist without Forgiveness of Sins
continually." This Forgiveness of Sins is "the Religion of
Jesus." It is a passing beyond oneself - a self-annihilation -
which can only be accomplished if you leave the "Natural."
"Those who Martyr others or who cause War are Deists,
but never can be Forgivers of Sin. The Glory of Christianity
is To Conquer by Forgiveness. All the Destruction, therefore,
in Christian Europe has arisen from Deism, which is Natural
Religion." [_J_52]
>However, when one cannot state one's principles outright in
>abstract language but is forced to do so through symbolism,
>is this not a >limitation in the modern world?
I believe that it is still true in today's world
that abstract language is limited and cannot begin to
express the contours of the Imaginative landscape.
I think that words and thoughts have a tendency to draw
attention to their own selves and thus to veil, rather
than reveal, spiritual truth. The language of symbolism
allows for the by-passing of rational and discursive
thought. The situation is analogous to that in the
world of the art and sculpture of Eastern religions.
And, of course, in Blake's own art.
>I think he was thinking through the problems of his
>time in the language that he knew, and the fact that
>he worked out extremely >advanced, modern epistemological
>and political perspectives in a religious>language dates
>and places him such that he could not be duplicated elsewhere.
Agreed.
Izak
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 10:21:00 +0200
From: P Van Schaik
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: Blake and "madness" -Reply -Reply/ Are we
allsemi-divine?-Reply -Reply -Reply
Message-Id:
Tim
I was trying to answer your question by providing a real-life example, not
trying to convert anyone or be harried into providing sources. However,
let me point out that the Theosophica Society is't a new age creation but ,
as may be gathered from its statements below, takes up the vies of
Gnosis viz. "He who possesses knowledge knows whence he is come
and whither he is going. He knows even as a person who, having been
intoxicated, has recovered...." This is from "The Gospel of Truth", in
New Testament Apocrypha, ed.w. Schneemelcher, p. 525.
The Kabbalists have a similar view of our divine origins and return there.
Both are in keeping with Blake's cosmogony, so there is no need to get
snide about loose new age thinking. All of this goes back before
established relgious orthodoxies, although the Theosophical Soc. is a
later manifestation of the mystical traditions.
If you read again there statements below, you'll see the similarities I've
mentioned.
"THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, while reserving for each member full
freedom to
interpret those teachings known as
Theosophy, is dedicated to preserving and realizing the ageless
wisdom,
which embodies both a world view and a vision of
human self-transformation.
This tradition is founded upon certain fundamental propositions:
1. The universe and all that exists within it are one interrelated and
interdependent whole.
2. Every existent being-from atom to galaxy-is rooted in the same
universal, life-creating Reality. This Reality is all pervasive,
but it can never be summed up in its parts, since it transcends all its
expressions. It reveals itself in the purposeful, ordered,
and meaningful processes of nature as well as in the deepest
recesses of
the mind and spirit.
************************************************
Having ahemed about the above you go on to say: I
wouldn't go quite so far as to say that this case is obviously fraudulent
without having reviewed the evidence myself, but I'd get quite close.
Several obvious questions:
1) Who funded the visit from Europe to Australia, and why?
I don't know, who, but it was meant to be a controlled experiment to test
out reincarnation theory.
2) What was the ratio of success to failure in the groups or people they
took across?
Three housewives were taken across, all of whom successfully gave
individual `proof' by their own reactions to being in Europe for the first
time and recognising aspects of past experience. The third was, in the
past life, a young Jewish girl shot in a cellar. She couldn't find her way
there after being dropped nearby, but the full horror of the events were
recalled, until the moment of her death when she saw her body as a
mere empty shell and her dead father coming to greet her. She `relived '
this experience in front of the camera.
3) How were subjects selected to make a trip or not?
They were chosen because they claimed to have lived within the last
300 years or 200 (can't remember) in Europe, and so there would still be
a chance of their identifying existing structures.
4) How was the site identified by the subject?
Subject was brought within a few blocks of the place she had drawn in
Australia, and then videotaped in shock when driven closer, following
her own memory. The owner of the chateau nearly collappsed with
fright to see the reality of what she'd drawn.
5) How is the theosophical society funded (hint: this is explained on their
site: subscriptions give 'discounts' to lectures!). I imagine the videos
aren't exactly given away either...
You're being very unpleasant here, Tim. Lectures are free, but a
donation is welcome, as at many public lectures in London. The video
was treated as a lecture.
6) What independant evidence of the matching patterns exist? Were
sealed
pictures of the designs provided to a third party before the investigation
was made (not in itself evidence of a positive outcome, but a mark of
goodfaith)?
The picture of the patter on the floor drawn in Australia exactly matched
the pattern in the small place, now used as a chicken house. 300 years
of shit had to be shovelled off the tiles to reveal the pattern.
In the case of the chateau, the housewife had drawn it very well in
Australia. A local historian who was interested in local archives wa not
aware of the existence of the dancing floor, at mezzanine level which
the housewife described, and for shich lintels were found under ivy on
site.
7)What archeological evidence exists to prove that the patterns in
Australia had not previously been located, and that they are real?
Answered above
Tim goes on to say: Vague mutterings about 'well science doesn't know
everything about
the 7 dimensions of space' are true enough (and typical of third age
evangelists, impressing the gullible with their apparent depth of
knowledge
of modern science,...............
As someone said in a recent posting, you know nothing about me and I
resnet being called what I am not. I am interested in the way esoteric
traditions relate to Blake - not at all interested in making converts to the
new age.
The rest of your sentence is equally off mark and insulting: " whilst
leaving an impression that those who know the
science properly are closed minded fools - some are, most are not), but
we
do know enough to design experiments to elimate hokum and fraud."
I happened to be impressed in a recent scientific journal by the new
scientific discoveries relating to 3 dimensions of time and seven of space
which I find fascinating as these findings relate to Kabbalistic lore. So
you are completely barking up the wrong tree ... I'm talking about the Tree
of Life, and am not interested in being nailed to the Poison Tree of
falsehood by any one. ... least of all other Blakeans, so get off my case.
Tim goes on: I sent you a reference to a short scientific explanation of
such matters,
which is well written, and (to my mind well balanced), which I urge you
to
find the time to read. (I'll post the reference for others on Monday, but do
not intend further posts on the subject which is now miles away from
Blake).
As I pointed out, none of the points you raise are adequate to cover the
manifold experiences reported by people who have been regressed or
had NDE"s . Stop bullying me... I have my own reading agenda.
Please note your own insults in the following which I resent:
"The point is this: there is nothing intrinsically wrong with people
believing any nonsense they choose to, .....more
worrying is the lack of critical thinking displayed by a professional in the
education system who is (or at least I assume so) engaged in literary
criticism."
I am not necessarily a believer in any system ... I merely like to read
widely and keep an open mind. No one , throughout history, has had
adequate knowledge to explain the human enigma in so vast a universe,
so I do not expect answers ... I do, however, like to hear all opinions and
love literature because it tells me more about the human condition and
aspirations. I don't aspire to be RIGHT but to be able to debate issues
openly. If you deny others this right, then you behave as badly
as tyrants throughout history have.
Pam
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 18:41:09 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Henriette Stavis
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: Blake Books Supplement
Message-Id:
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Dear Edward Larrissy,
Thank you for the tip. Others on the list have also been telling me that
I really need to get hold of the BLAKE BOOKS. I will try to get hold of
BLAKE BOOKS SUPPLEMENT when I get a free moment.
Henriette Stavis
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 22:31:24 +0100
From: timli@controls.eurotherm.co.uk (Tim Linnell)
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: Blake and "madness" -Reply -Reply/ Are weallsemi-divine?-Reply -Reply -Reply
Message-Id: <199809082131.WAA08190@merlot.controls.eurotherm.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Pam,
I'm astonished by your post.
You say you have irrefutable evidence of reincarnation, yet when challenged
it turns out to be so flimsy it disintegrates under the slightest
examination. There were no controls on this 'experiment' whatsoever, and
claiming the contrary is pure self deception. It was a video produced by an
interested party who presume their findings as part of their basic beliefs.
Period.
You claim to be open minded, and rail at the limitations of scientific
orthodoxy, yet refuse to spend 20 minutes reading a properly constructed and
well balanced scientific answer to your claims, citing 'your own reading
agenda' and suggesting that I am bullying you by asking for simple
references to support what you say is incontrovertible fact. I am not: I am
simply asking you to confront your prejudices as you ask me to confront mine.
You attack me for dismissing New Age beliefs too lightly, and then again for
dismissing them in detail.
Well unpleasant I may be, but I have sufficient regard for truth to cry foul
when highly questionable statements are presented as fact, nonsensical
evidence cited as authoritative, and vague psuedo-science used to bind the
heaving mass of falsehood together.
For which I apologize.
Tim
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 18:26:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ralph Dumain
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: Ralph's questions
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980908211925.3f5fc2ae@pop.igc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 11:21 PM 9/7/98, Izak Bouwer wrote:
>It therefore seems that for Blake atheism relates to the
>preoccupation with appearances (sensuous pleasures,
>natural phenomena), rather than with the world of the
>spirit. By the way, I am sure that modern day science
>would still be included in Blake's category of atheism -
>for it deals with phenomena in the world of appearance.
Meaning that Blake is still trapped within the semantic system of
Christianity even while engaging in a radical reversal of its values. An
atheist or deist he liked (someone like Paine) would have to be
reinterpreted so as not to be an atheist, unbeliever, etc. From our vantage
point in history this will not pass. As for modern science dealing with the
world of appearance only, that is a matter of opinion, but it is very
convenient for those who want to be both bourgeois and Christian, like
Berkeley. We'll use science when it's convenience, but God forbid it should
have any status as truth, just in case we should be held accountable for
what we believe.
>In the process of the Fall, the Spirit is poured into
>vessels (churches, or the Covering Cherub) that harden
>(thus serving as prisons, and simultaneously as protective
>covers) until they can be safely cast off at the Last Judgment.
This reminds me of Pam's (and others'?) posts reminding us that these awful
religions also set a limit to man's Fall. I need to think more about this,
because I've always been intrigued by This concept but I can't say I fully
understand it.
>I would say, as Blake argues in Chapter 3 "To the Deists,"
>that Deism is the worship of "the Selfish Virtues of the
>Natural Heart." Any Deist is "in the State named Rahab,
>which State must be put off before he can be the Friend of Man."
>And "Friendship cannot exist without Forgiveness of Sins
>continually." This Forgiveness of Sins is "the Religion of
>Jesus." It is a passing beyond oneself - a self-annihilation -
>which can only be accomplished if you leave the "Natural."
Thus Bake perpetuates a historical conflation. It is true that Deism
coincides with the bourgeois revolution, so socially, politically, adj
existentially, its real social existence, and aspects of its ideas (i.e.
rationalism towards nature, but inadequate attention to the nature of the
human), so Blake, impatient to get the bourgeois revolution over with and
move on to something more advanced, rejects liberalism and perpetuates a
constellation of unanalyzed conflations. Blake, usually a dialectical
thinker, has a tendency to fudge when it comes to these issues, but he can
only get away with this because the outward creation does not concern him at
all, except when he's working with his copper plates and so forth.
>"Those who Martyr others or who cause War are Deists,
>but never can be Forgivers of Sin. The Glory of Christianity
>is To Conquer by Forgiveness. All the Destruction, therefore,
>in Christian Europe has arisen from Deism, which is Natural
>Religion." [_J_52]
This, of course, is complete nonsense. Itt means that the Catholic Church
is deist, that the protestant cruces are all deists, that every vicious
religion that has ever existed is deist. It takes a twist of semantics to
make this go, understandable, but not very edifying to those who don't come
out of the same tradition. The best place Blake makes his case is "The Song
of Los"; elsewise this rhetoric is a royal pain in the ass.
>>However, when one cannot state one's principles outright in
>>abstract language but is forced to do so through symbolism,
>>is this not a >limitation in the modern world?
>
>I believe that it is still true in today's world
>that abstract language is limited and cannot begin to
>express the contours of the Imaginative landscape.
>I think that words and thoughts have a tendency to draw
>attention to their own selves and thus to veil, rather
>than reveal, spiritual truth. The language of symbolism
>allows for the by-passing of rational and discursive
>thought. The situation is analogous to that in the
>world of the art and sculpture of Eastern religions.
>And, of course, in Blake's own art.
This is complete nonsense as well. However, I don't want to belabor the
point against Blake, since it is so obvious that he was not the type to set
forth propositional analyses in abstract language, though he was perfectly
capable of doing so to some extent. Obviously, Blake worked differently,
but given that our world is larger and that we know more semantic universes
than Blake's, and that most of the world including fundamentalist lunkheads
is more interested in what it takes to be literal truth than any so-called
spiritual truth, your statement is untenable. Metaphor and imagery, as
opposed to abstract language, is much more inclined to draw attention to
itself and hence veil the covert, underlying meanings. These underlying
meanings must be articulated at some historical point, they cannot forever
remain merely implicit. The human race has advanced in the past 200 years.
The language of symbolism has to be recognized as such, but it can only be
done so outside of symbolism. Blake was highly ambivalent about these
matters. My purpose here is not to point the finger at Blake, but rather to
point out where we must stand if we are to bother analyzing his statements
at all. The Blake discussion list is prose; we could not have a discussion
of any kind using poetry only. We have to decode Blake; we can't just take
him literally. We can only read Blake as poetry, not as prose.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 09:36:15 +0200
From: P Van Schaik
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: Blake and "madness" -Reply -Reply/ Are
weallsemi-divine?-Reply -Reply -Reply -Reply
Message-Id:
Tim
You claim things that I am sure I didn't say , nor even imply as my
intention in replying to you was to answer the specific questions you
posed . What I DID say is that I do not believe anyone has the answers to
man's enigmatic existence in the universe and that I read literature as
well as whatever else I think may throw light on the subject.
Of course, in citing a video and my own personal experience of
apparent contact with the dead, I do not claim what YOU, not me, refer
to as l `irrefutable evidence of reincarnation'.. I cited a few examples
which did not seem covered by your citings of scientific fact. ... by way
of debate. I have no interest in converting anyone, so if you are feeling
insecure, don't lay the blame on me. I have a very slow computer at
work, a 386, which presently has a firewall up on Netscape, and a
full-time job to do from which I steal time to talk online.
So I insist that I cannot simply fall in line with your taking the argument
elsewhere. I haven't even had time to look at the major Blake sites, nor
get my own work up on the web.
You say you have irrefutable evidence of reincarnation, yet when
challenged
it turns out to be so flimsy it disintegrates under the slightest
examination. There were no controls on this 'experiment' whatsoever,
and
claiming the contrary is pure self deception. It was a video produced by
an
interested party who presume their findings as part of their basic beliefs.
Period.
Perhaps someone else is sending you post in my name? I don't recall
doing the following either: "You attack me for dismissing New Age
beliefs too lightly, and then again for dismissing them in detail."
Why don't you ask the Theosophical Society re the videotape and who
financed it? I don't think the Society had anything to do with financing it
... as showing it does not necessarily mean more than borrowing a
resource applicable to the Society's interests. I can only answer your
questions from what I recall seeing as a rare guest of the Society.
Thank you Izak for your most recent posting re what Blake would have
seen as atheism.... I agree with everything you say there.
Pam
--------------------------------
End of blake-d Digest V1998 Issue #61
*************************************